On Fri, 2016-04-22 at 01:59 -0700, Hal Murray wrote: > [email protected] said: > > > > I agree that publishing a table is a good idea. Any suggestions > > on the format? > ntpd knows how to parse a file with times when leap seconds did > and/or will > happen. Sample here: > http://www.ietf.org/timezones/data/leap-seconds.list > It's got enough comments to explain what's going on. > > It's using NTP time - relative to 1 January 1900, 00:00:00 > > You could use the same format with negative numbers for before 1900 > or pick > your own starting point. > >
I like using DTAI instead of Delta T in the second column, since DTAI is based on TAI, which drives UTC, whereas Delta T is based on TT. However, I don't like the coding for the first column. It goes negative before 1900, as you mentioned, and it seems too NTP-oriented. How about just using the Julian Day Number? Column 1 can be the Julian Day Number of the extraordinary day, column 2 can be the new value of DTAI reached at the end of the day, and the text after the # can be the date spelled out. Since DTAI is defined as 0 on January 1, 1958, an entry would be 2436204 0 # 31 Dec 1957 Strictly speaking, Julian Day Number 2436204.0 is noon on December 31, 1957, but we are just using the number to specify the day, not to specify the time within that day. What do you think? John Sauter ([email protected]) -- PGP fingerprint = E24A D25B E5FE 4914 A603 49EC 7030 3EA1 9A0B 511E
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list [email protected] https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
